Virgil sez > After listening to Ted Liu I'm...split 50/50 on the issue of whether > to change and better the act or don't do any changes at all which > most of the community has agreed. then Warren sez > ...but I think the issue is the stimulus was too large, and with some > loopholes some companies are taking [my insert="unfair"] advantage of > the situation.
OK, I'll weigh-in on this one, and I was very aware of the Liu talk this past evening, was curious, but just could not squeeze it in. Wish I could hear the snynopis of that one. Any bias that I might be accused of would be because I kinda follow those cyber/electronic pizza guyz(Courtney, Eran, and the gang) that meet the first two Tuesday's of every month at Ocean on UH Manoa campus. I sense I fit in with the (silent) majority of all you who watch the traffic on the luau list if for no other reason than the sheer entertainment value. God willing, I'll live long enough to actually take advantage of the brain trust that is in evidence here and become an effective open source warrior. Concerning Act 221, if I recall an early explanation, tax liabilities for the capitalists of an IT "defined" venture are eliminated and amortized over the initial five-year period of the life of the company. The idea was that it would be a hand up, as compared to a hand out, to get a venture past the gestation phase, and from then on the venture would shoulder the ongoing tax liabilities like any other business. 'Let's foster an island "silicon valley"'. This waiver can turn out to be quite substantial and potentially the linchpin for such a venture to choose Hawai`i for it's birth. The loop hole, has been that certain IT "defined" ventures have taken advantage of this hand up with absolutely no desire to live longer than the 5 year window that Act 221 provides. "Blue Crush" and any movie venture is a perfect example of this kind of abuse. None of us would ever define whatever the movie industry does as a business as an "IT" venture(more specifically, one designed to last longer than 5 years) and whoever allowed this precedent should be pilloried. Don't get me wrong, whatever benefit to our islands' economy because of TV and movie efforts over the past decades including "Hawaiian Eye", Hawai`i 5-0", "Magnum PI", certain sitcom's summer vacation episodes filmed in Hawai`i(I was an extra on Maui one summer a long time ago for such a "Growing Pains" episode), "North Shore", "Blue Crush" and many more..., these benefits I think were substantial and the TV/film industry should be encouraged to produce in Hawai`i...not through Act 221. We should stay extremely vocal...plug the loop hole...and I think keep the basic numbers as they exist in the plan intact...but somehow there needs to be a way to ensure that this thing doesn't create 5-years-and- out-by-design efforts. Next person on the soap box, please.-Ben
